Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Digital Music Eyewear From Oakley

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the listen-to-them-frames dept.

Mecha-A writes "Am I the only one that finds this insanely awesome? Oakley is marketing a new line of digital music eyewear in time for the holidays. $400-$500 is an obscene lot for a small USB MP3 player, but the coolness factor is way up there. Questions: Is a brand name like Oakley going to get this idea off the ground? Who's going to be first to market this same thing except with a 'now playing' HUD on the sunglasses?"

13 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. Paying for "Oakley" not MP3 player by frdmfghtr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My guess is that you're playing for the Oakley sunglasses...the MP3 players is more or less a tag-along, as far as cost is concerned.

    As somebody who has never owned a pair of Oakleys, I ask: wht does a good pair cost?

    --
    Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    1. Re:Paying for "Oakley" not MP3 player by caferace · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The most expensive pair of Oakleys, the "Juliet" model will run you at leastUSD $250. Dealer cost is around $150, so markup of course takes it toll.

      That being said, I have had a pair for over 2 years now, and they are awesome. Very, very strong (I used to break cheaper sunglasses al the time) and light as a feather. A heavy feather mind you....

    2. Re:Paying for "Oakley" not MP3 player by vettemph · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, a previous poster pointed out that he once spent $40 on a pair of sunglasses. He regrets it because he then sat on them.

      I spent $80 on a pair of oakleys back in 1990 and sat on them 10 times. each time a lense popped out and an arm popped off. I just popped them back on an all was well. (if you do the math it's like having 10 pairs of $8 glasses over the course of 2 years.)

      Also, at work, a high velocity bolt hit me in the "glasses", the oakleys came away with a small scratch.

      So, you can truly get you moneys worth sometimes.

      Oh, and I was getting laid http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Laid like crazy back then. (this was before I found slashdot)

      I admit that I'll never spend $80 on a pair of sunglasses again but I'm proud to be more of an ignorant bastard now than I ever was. :)

      --
      The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
    3. Re:Paying for "Oakley" not MP3 player by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Believe me, I am not one to believe that "money = quality". But I also refuse to accept the counterculture view that "money = luxurious waste".

      I bought a pair of $400(AU) Oakleys around two years ago that I still use. I didn't go by brand or price. I just looked at all the shades in a sunglass shop, and picked out the one that appealed to me the most aesthetically, which coincidentally happened to be one of the most expensive ones in the shop. But I don't care if something I want to buy is cheap or expensive, and I don't look at the brand, all that matters to me is if I am drawn to it the most. It could have just as well been the cheapest in the store (as long as it had the proper UV protection). As it so happens, whenever I do that for sunglasses, I always pick something that costs a fortune.

  2. Am I supposed to identify with these guys ? by obarthelemy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I guess I am not in the target market (then again, I'm 36 and French): the very large face shots that illustrate the product actually repulse me.

    Why don't they just sell a product instead of a lifestyle ?

    Apart from the fact that I find the sades both ugly and flashy, I find the idea quite good... 1 item less to carry. Oh wait, my bluetooth phone already does MP3 and FM.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  3. The Future of Computing? by FVK · · Score: 2, Interesting


    A couple years ago I remember talking to a mac-geek friend of mine and he said "Someday, Apple will be an eyewear company"

    This obviously only makes sense in a future where the network is CPU and Storage, wireless is very fast and advanced, and the glasses are basically just display technology.

    How likely is this future, maybe as a precursor to direct neural jacks ala Matrix?

    Do slashdotters believe the "Network is the Computer" idea will eventually come to be ?

  4. no way by almostmanda · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The IPatch is WAY cooler.

  5. Dodgy pictures? by polyp2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Am I the only one here that thinks
    a) the design of the glasses look like something you might get free with a happy meal?
    b) the "models" have their mouths open and look slightly gay?

    I was expecting something a little more slick to be honest.

    I wouldnt be seen dead wearing a pair of those.

    Nick ...

    --
    Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
  6. the coolness factor by dncsky1530 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the coolness factor is way up there.

    For the price of the sunglasses you can get an iPod, which also has a great coolness factor plut the functionality.

    When I go to buy sunglasses I look for the ones that are lite and easy to put in my pocket, these sunglasses look pretty similr to a science project where you tape a USB memory stick mp3 player and tape it to a pair of sunglasses. Definately not worth 395$ or even half that. Of course thats just my opinion, i'm sure i don't speak for most people

  7. Picture by Mephie · · Score: 2, Interesting
    That picture has been photoshopped so much, she almost looks fake.

    At any rate, I personally think Oakleys are over rated and over priced. Get a pair of Rudy Projects and a decent MP3 player for the same price and have better sunglasses and better mp3 player.

    --
    Buy the President
  8. First thoughts by fermion · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It looks like there is growth coming out of the sunglasses. Quite ugly. It appears to be a quick hack will little thought of the aesthetics. Quite not Oakley. On the other hands Oakley are more and more worn by people who want to look cool and hip, and need quite a bit help with that image.

    OTOH the lack of wires is a big benefit for many applications. If I were working outside often I would definitely consider a pair of these. Of course the battery life makes it unsuitable for anyone but the hobbyist, but that is still a market.

    In future versions I hope they put bluetooth connectivity for a remote and hookup to a cell phone as an additional mic. In fact, this might be a better product all together.

    The biggest problem might be for someone who uses this regularly. The battery will run out, probably lose half it's lifetime in relatively short order, then what happens. Throw the entire thing away?

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  9. Re:Not targeting slashdot crowd ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > They target skiiers, snowboarders, skateboarders, cyclists, etc.

    As a former IT guy for Burton, I can tell you that might be who Oakley markets to, but they, like we did, had the same damn problem. Instead of intelligent people buying our products, most of our customers were white trash. My question is, how in the hell does Oakley expect to get white trash to spend $500 on a pair of sunglasses when they won't spent $3 on deodorant or more than $10 on a shirt? I think their marketing department was on drugs when they decided to pimp this product. They forget who their customers are. It's almost as bad as the last product we were developing before I retired. It was a jacket made to hold an iPod. For most of our customers, buying an expensive jacket from us was a large stretch. When you put a $400 iPod with it, it's out of the reach of most of our customers.

  10. I miss one important piece of information by clsc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Where can i BUY that stuff? Right Now!

    *me wantssssss it*